PURPOSE: This study aimed to carry out a comprehensive analysis of genetic and epigenetic changes of the von Hippel Lindau (VHL) gene in patients with conventional (clear cell) renal cell carcinoma and to determine their significance relative to clinicopathologic characteristics and outcome. EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN: The VHL status in 86 conventional renal cell carcinomas was determined by mutation detection, loss of heterozygosity (LOH), and promoter methylation analysis, extending our original cohort to a total of 177 patients. Data were analyzed to investigate potential relationships between VHL changes, clinical parameters, and outcome. RESULTS: LOH was found in 89.2%, mutation in 74.6%, and methylation in 31.3% of evaluable tumors; evidence of biallelic inactivation (LOH and mutation or methylation alone) was found in 86.0% whereas no involvement of VHL was found in only 3.4% of samples. Several associations were suggested, including those between LOH and grade, nodal status and necrosis, mutation and sex, and methylation and grade. Biallelic inactivation may be associated with better overall survival compared with patients with no VHL involvement, although small sample numbers in the latter group severely limit this analysis, which requires independent confirmation. CONCLUSIONS: This study reports one of the highest proportions of conventional renal cell carcinoma with VHL changes, and suggests possible relationships between VHL status and clinical variables. The data suggest that VHL defects may define conventional renal cell carcinomas but the clinical significance of specific VHL alterations will only be clarified by the determination of their biological effect at the protein level rather than through genetic or epigenetic analysis alone. (Clin Cancer Res 2009;15(24):7582-92).
PURPOSE: This study aimed to carry out a comprehensive analysis of genetic and epigenetic changes of the von Hippel Lindau (VHL) gene in patients with conventional (clear cell) renal cell carcinoma and to determine their significance relative to clinicopathologic characteristics and outcome. EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN: The VHL status in 86 conventional renal cell carcinomas was determined by mutation detection, loss of heterozygosity (LOH), and promoter methylation analysis, extending our original cohort to a total of 177 patients. Data were analyzed to investigate potential relationships between VHL changes, clinical parameters, and outcome. RESULTS: LOH was found in 89.2%, mutation in 74.6%, and methylation in 31.3% of evaluable tumors; evidence of biallelic inactivation (LOH and mutation or methylation alone) was found in 86.0% whereas no involvement of VHL was found in only 3.4% of samples. Several associations were suggested, including those between LOH and grade, nodal status and necrosis, mutation and sex, and methylation and grade. Biallelic inactivation may be associated with better overall survival compared with patients with no VHL involvement, although small sample numbers in the latter group severely limit this analysis, which requires independent confirmation. CONCLUSIONS: This study reports one of the highest proportions of conventional renal cell carcinoma with VHL changes, and suggests possible relationships between VHL status and clinical variables. The data suggest that VHL defects may define conventional renal cell carcinomas but the clinical significance of specific VHL alterations will only be clarified by the determination of their biological effect at the protein level rather than through genetic or epigenetic analysis alone. (Clin Cancer Res 2009;15(24):7582-92).
Authors: I Lemm; A Lingott; E Pogge v Strandmann; C Zoidl; M P Bulman; A T Hattersley; W A Schulz; T Ebert; G U Ryffel Journal: Mol Carcinog Date: 1999-04 Impact factor: 4.784
Authors: G Kovacs; M Akhtar; B J Beckwith; P Bugert; C S Cooper; B Delahunt; J N Eble; S Fleming; B Ljungberg; L J Medeiros; H Moch; V E Reuter; E Ritz; G Roos; D Schmidt; J R Srigley; S Störkel; E van den Berg; B Zbar Journal: J Pathol Date: 1997-10 Impact factor: 7.996
Authors: Xi Na; Guan Wu; Charlotte K Ryan; Susan R Schoen; P Anthony di'Santagnese; Edward M Messing Journal: J Urol Date: 2003-08 Impact factor: 7.450
Authors: Rosamonde E Banks; Prasanna Tirukonda; Claire Taylor; Nick Hornigold; Dewi Astuti; Dena Cohen; Eamonn R Maher; Anthea J Stanley; Patricia Harnden; Adrian Joyce; Margaret Knowles; Peter J Selby Journal: Cancer Res Date: 2006-02-15 Impact factor: 12.701
Authors: Jean-Jacques Patard; Patricia Fergelot; Pierre I Karakiewicz; Tobias Klatte; Quoc-Dien Trinh; Nathalie Rioux-Leclercq; Jonathan W Said; Arie S Belldegrun; Allan J Pantuck Journal: Int J Cancer Date: 2008-07-15 Impact factor: 7.396
Authors: Kjeld P van Houwelingen; Boukje A C van Dijk; Christina A Hulsbergen-van de Kaa; Leo J Schouten; Hanneke J M Gorissen; Jack A Schalken; Piet A van den Brandt; Egbert Oosterwijk Journal: BMC Cancer Date: 2005-06-02 Impact factor: 4.430
Authors: Tamina Seeger-Nukpezah; Daniel M Geynisman; Anna S Nikonova; Thomas Benzing; Erica A Golemis Journal: Nat Rev Nephrol Date: 2015-04-14 Impact factor: 28.314
Authors: Mariana Rezende Alves; Felipe Cavalcanti Carneiro; André Mourão Lavorato-Rocha; Walter Henriques da Costa; Isabela Werneck da Cunha; Stênio de Cássio Zequi; Gustavo Cardoso Guimaraes; Fernando Augusto Soares; Dirce Maria Carraro; Rafael Malagoli Rocha Journal: Virchows Arch Date: 2014-07-16 Impact factor: 4.064
Authors: Lucie Lanikova; Felipe Lorenzo; Chunzhang Yang; Hari Vankayalapati; Richard Drachtman; Vladimir Divoky; Josef T Prchal Journal: Blood Date: 2013-03-28 Impact factor: 22.113
Authors: S L Wood; M Rogers; D A Cairns; A Paul; D Thompson; N S Vasudev; P J Selby; R E Banks Journal: Br J Cancer Date: 2010-06-08 Impact factor: 7.640